Talk:The Four Horsemen
Does anyone know if Riders of Dhuum are bosses or just regular monsters? My outdated video card doesn't display the boss auras, and my group got wiped out before we could defeat any of them so I'm not sure if there's a morale boost. -- Gordon Ecker 05:23, 2 February 2006 (UTC) Metallica There is a metallica song called the four horsemen (Kill 'Em All), and theres the biblical four horsemen, I don't know how to put this into the article though. I'd think ANet would be referencing metallica rather than the bible, looking at the other cultural references :p Skuld 11:19, 10 April 2006 (CDT) : I'm sure it's a reference to the song, especially when you look at the Male Warrior's guitar animation :) LordKestrel 11:30, 10 April 2006 (CDT) :Now let's guess to whom that song by Metallica is referring... It all comes down to the Bible in the end. ;) --[[User:Eightyfour-onesevenfive|'84-175']] (talk) 12:35, 10 April 2006 (CDT) ::I meant that :D Skuld 12:39, 10 April 2006 (CDT) non-repeatable? Is this quest non-repeatable, or is the icon missing? (see also Talk:Terrorweb_Queen). [[User:Foo|'Foo']] 08:17, 18 April 2006 (CDT) Copyright Issues I am sorry to say, but the walktrough section is entirely copied from here. :Why are you sorry to say that? - 01:34, 29 June 2006 (CDT) :: I am sorry because it is quite a good description :) I asked Tarosian over at User_talk:The_King_Tarosian#The_Four_Horsemen_walkthrough if he got permission to use that text, but judging from Skuld's last question for him, it might be a while before we get a response. --68.142.14.84 06:09, 29 June 2006 (CDT) :It should be made clear that the issue here is not permission as you stated on Tarosian's page. The issue is referencing. If he did copy it from there, then we need to list that as a reference (or I'll just rewrite it myself having done it). We do not need anyone's permission for a post placed on a public forum. It's just good style to list them as the source that is all. It may be that Tarosian was one of the people who helped compile that thread and as such needed to give no credit, I don't know. Either way, there is no permission to seek. --Karlos 11:06, 29 June 2006 (CDT) ::No, it is the only issue. Just because it's public doesn't mean we can reproduce someone else's text without permission. That's like saying a song on the radio is free for everyone to copy as they please. Whether or not we provide credit, without permission (or a license, which I guess is the same as permission) the only way to use it is if it's fair use, which it's not. This is not like copying someone else's map where the artwork is owned by ANet and the mapper is only stating a fact ("the boss is here"). --68.142.14.71 11:41, 29 June 2006 (CDT) :::Unless you can provide a legal statement on Guildwarsguru.com that states that content in their forums is subject to copyright laws, then you are making stuff up. Yes, believe it or not, stuff you post in public forums does NOT belong to you. You would need to specifically state any copyright issues in order for others to be bound by them. This is not what you personally feel is copyright laws, this is what IS copyright laws. Now, what is wrong, is for someone to read it there, then come here and post it as his work. That is an obfuscation of credit as well as obfuscating the source of the information which helps in validating it. --Karlos 11:52, 29 June 2006 (CDT) ::::You do not need to put a copyright notice on anything for you to own the copyright if you are the creator of the work. I think you're the one who has obscure "feelings" about copyright law. The work being available to the public or being on an Internet forum is completely irrelevant. The only reason some forums say things like "all comments are owned by their respective posters" is to attempt to shield themselves from liability. --68.142.14.71 12:29, 29 June 2006 (CDT) :::::My understanding (I'm not a lawyer) is that a copyright exists on all original documents the moment they are published, even if the text isn't marked as copyrighted. The absence of a copyright notice does not mean it is in the public domain. I'm not aware of court cases to test the full limits of copyright law; but I would expect it to cover public postings in chat forums and message boards. --161.88.255.139 13:05, 29 June 2006 (CDT) ::::If the content came from that person, then no one is questioning that they should be credited. The issue here is one of "permission" not "recognition." Whom should we ask for permission to republish this information, the author or Guru? My belief is that, when the author submitted the work through Guru, THAT copy on Guru became subject to Guru's laws (in my view, public domain). And as far as I know Guru does not have any laws or regularions against copying content off the forum and placing it elsewhere. The medium through which you presented your work is extremely relevant. If you record a new song through Sony, you can bet they will have rights to reproduce and make money off that song, even if you hate them. If you call in a radio show and voice your thoughts, even though they are your thoughts, that radio station can replay them and put them in sound bites and even give them to other stations to replay them, even though they are "your" words. So, the medium here is EXACTLY what we are talking about. I have fired Inde at Guru a message about this issue, hopefully we'll hear from him here on if he messages me, I'll let you know. --Karlos 16:47, 29 June 2006 (CDT) :::::You are plain wrong. If you're a music artist, you have a contract that says who owns what. An artist usually has to sign a contract because they don't have enough money to afford studio time, marketing, or large scale CD production or shipping. Labels pay for those things and in return usually abuse the hell out of the artist by saying we own your work, we'll pay you a pittance in royalties, you owe us $x for what we've done, and you also have to make two more albums for us. That situation is infinitely more complex than this. For a radio interview, a radio station always has to get permission from the interviewee before airing. This might be implicit as in "hey, I want to interview you for my show," "sure." In general, the interviewer owns the copyright of interviews. This is not cut and dry; the law does not specifically address interviews. I will look up and cite court cases if you care. :::::The medium is irrelevant. The author of a copyrightable work owns it unless he specifically hands over the copyright to another, he releases it to the public domain, or if the work is a "work for hire" (for example, a program coded by an employee for this employer, and even further, any tools he coded to get the job done). :::::I own the copyright on this comment I'm writing right now. It's on the wiki and anyone can read it. I've licensed it to the wiki under the CC license, and the wiki is prodiving the comment to everyone who reads it under that same license. But I still own the copyright on this text. No one else can use this comment for commercial purposes but me, since the CC license forbids commercial use. In fact, everyone in the world can do whatever they want with this comment as long as the CC license allows it. I''' can do '''anything at all I want, since I own it. Beyond fair use, other peoples' use of this comment hinges around the fact that the text below the edit box basically says "by submitting this, you license it out under the CC license." On the other hand, GWG has no such agreement. When signing up or when posting, nowhere does it say GWG owns the comment or that the submitter licenses it under any license. If Inde says "GWG owns the copyright" on that post then Inde is absolutely and legally wrong. If Inde says "GWG gives us permission to use the text" he has no right to do so. --68.142.14.71 18:22, 29 June 2006 (CDT) ::::::Forgive me if this is entirely formatted wrong since it's my first time using a wiki. Hi, Inde - Guild Wars Guru. Actually, anonymous user, I said neither. GWG does not own the content, it's public domain being a forum. GWG "encourages" you to ask the original poster to use the content. Most are very happy to be recognized and will gladly work with you. There is the rare occassion where a user does not want their content posted in an official sense. I commented to Karlos that even for Guru's own article section we seek permission from the original poster to put it up. If the user fails to respond, I put it up but am more than happy to take it down or adjust it if they contact me. Because, as you said... "The author of a copyrightable work owns it unless... he releases it to the public domain." Posting on a forum is public domain. ::::::Everyone tries to interpret copyright law, I've been subjected to this more times than you can count. While the original author does "own" a copyright on their work, it would never fly in a court of law. Why? First off you have not filed for a copyright on the material. Since it's not registered, if someone were to truly want to pursue action they would be paying all court costs out of their pockent and could not recoup that since they didn't file. How do I know for certain? I've just had to file a lawsuit with a client of mine who is using my copyrighted work. Throw all the court cases you can at me because I'm living through it right now. (It is in no way connected to Guild Wars Guru, I do advertising and graphic design.) Of course this goes to far, most talk such as this is just accusations and legal jaron flying every direction. ::::::I have responded to Karlos that you are welcome to use any material that you find in the Guru forum's since this is public domain. People generally post with the intention of sharing this information to the community and once they find out that people want it even more widespread, embrace it with open arms. I strongly encourage all you Wikians to contact the original poster and politely ask if you can copy the content over here. As I said, they are usually flattered and more then willing to work with you. Guild Wars Guru is very open with the sharing of content and I have not seen a problem on this Wiki before where a link was not given to the original or a note of credit. I will not be sending any cease & desist or vulgar posts to you asking you to remove content. We love you guys and are more than happy to help with the sharing of information to benefit the community.